This kinda irks me, because people always say stuff like this, that "the Saints make rookie quarterbacks look like Hall of Famers" or "we always lose to the rookie quarterbacks" on Saints message boards and it's just plain old NOT TRUE. Or not entirely true.


The ONLY times that rookie or unknown or "nobody" or backup quarterbacks ever looked really good against the Gregg Williams Saints D, was when the QB on the field wasn't the same QB that the team prepared for during the week (Seattle playoffs, Titans game), or else when the QB was changed mid-season a week or two before and there wasn't a lot of film on them (Arizona, Cleveland and the Rams all made a major QB change only a week or two before the game, for example).

When the QB on the field is WHO THE SAINTS ARE EXPECTING TO BE THERE, rookie quarterbacks tend to look okay at best ,but certainly not great, if the Saints were prepared for them and not somebody else. Josh Freeman (38-7 blowout), Cam's first game against the Saints, and Matt Stafford in the '09 opener for example. I believe Sanchez was also a rookie that first year in '09 for the Jets, and he looked so-so and got completely ineffective and frustrated by the end of the game. I actually broke this down with more games and teams, I can't remember all of them now. And it's just NOT true to say the Saints play bad against rookie QB's. It's when the rookie or backup QB is not expected, or changes the Thursday before the game, THAT'S when it's a problem.